The U.S. Admits Neo Nazis are fighting in Ukraine

After denying Russian reports of the growing threat of Neo-Nazi organizations operating in Ukraine such as the "Svaboda" and the now infamous "Azov" battalion. The U.S. has not only aknowledged the fact but also passed a law banning any financial or military support to the factions. This did not sit very well with Ukrainian authorities who have publicly named the factions "heroes" of Ukraine and handed out numerous medals to the ultra right wing nationalists....

https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/


Turns out that these very same factions whom I have campaigned against by trying to explain to many on here and to no avail that they are NOT Ukrainian Patriots and freedom fighters as some in here have claimed but in fact Nazis. By passing this ban the U.S. Has officially admitted that what Russia has been claiming from day one, does in fact have merit and not just more lies or propaganda from a police state as some in here tend to believe.

 

It is understatement to say that Neo-Nazis exist within the present day Ukraine. Ukraine today is a Nazi regime itself: in every aspect - Ukraine entirely resembles the Nazi Germany and Russians are Ukrainian Jews. The only option to solve the "Russian Problem" is to separate that rotten edifice into two separate states. Otherwise, the Russian population will suffer what the Jews suffered in the Nazi Germany. The root of the problem is determination of the US government to dominate every square inch of this planet.

 

Stop believing your own propaganda...

First...This has not...repeat...not...been passed into law. The bill is a House Resolution that was passed, it will now move on the the US Senate for discussion and vote. If it passes the US Senate, it will go before the US President to be signed into Law. However, conventional wisdom points to Obama rejecting the bill...for reasons unrelated to the Ukraine...if so, it will go back to Congress.

The only faction so banned is the Azov Battalion.

Nor is their any outright admission that the Azov is nazi/neo-nazi

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2685/text

I now return you to your regularly scheduled propaganda...

 

The truth is not what the US Senate decides. The fact is that innocent civilians are being murdered by the Ukrainian regime. That is the truth, not the propaganda you parrot.

But, I know, you will return you to your regularly scheduled propaganda...

 

Well schucks...Pointing out clear errors in the reporter's "news" article is propaganda?

Perhaps said reporter should have invested a little more time in research before putting pen to paper or fingers to keyboard.

 

Gentlemen please let's keep this civil and constructive.

Takao I'm a bit confused by your post. While I do see my silly mistake by claiming the a "law" was passed when it was instead 3 amendments in the House of Representatives, I fail to see the propaganda.

The sole purpose of this bill was/is to prevent ultra nationalists from receiving any kind of assistance/aid from the U.S. The individuals whom this bill was intended for belong to the Azov battalion a A battalion which is made up solely of ultranationalists and neo-Nazis. How is the passing of this bill NOT an admission that Nazis are present in Ukraine?

"I am grateful that the House of Representatives unanimously passed my amendments last night to ensure that our military does not train members of the repulsive neo-Nazi Azov battalion..."

You have an issue with the bill or what congressmen Conyers said?


http://conyers.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=0DC46F90-801E-433D-B565-5E8A67C81A83

 

Smoke and mirrors. The fact that the certain members of the US political scene are seeking to prevent military aid going into the hands of a few fascists does not exonerate Russia from its behaviour in the Ukraine.

Nor is it a blanket statement of "proof" that the entire Ukraine is one big Factory producing Nazis, which Tamino would have us believe. Comparing the situation for Russians in the Ukraine to the Jewish holocaust is rediculous.

 

While digging around on this issue, I have seen several "pro-Russian" sites that had made the same mistake. That is why I called it propaganda, they were making H.R.2685 into something it is not.

The sole purpose of H.R.2685 is how the Department of Defense will spend it's budget...Paying troops, buying weapons, etc.
You have confused Conyers' amendment of the Bill, with the entire Bill.

The Bill does not mention Nazis, Neo-Nazis, Fascists, or little green men on the moon. Only Conyer's self-congratulatory press release does. Further it was passed by voice vote - of which no record is kept, so we have no way of knowing how many yeas and nays there were...Nor do we know how many Representatives were even present for such a vote. Having watched too much C-SPAN, for most of these voice votes, there are few Representatives actually present.

As such, I have questions with Conyers statement, since I could not find a vote record on the amendment. But, I also question the Pro-Russian statements that are turning this mole-hill into some sort of mountain.

 

I think you are both misreading and misinterpreting things. There has been little denial that there were some extreme right wing elements in the Ukrainian parlement (including Neo Nazis). It's not clear that they are or the US considers them to be a "growing" threat however. It's also pretty clear that Russian actions have strengthened this faction.

That's a false dicotomy. They can easily be both (or is it all three). Indeed any fighting the Russians and their seperatist "allies" (I'm being genereous here) can rightly be considered Ukrainian Patriots and possibly freedom fighters. Nor is it at all clear what percentage of the forces fighting the Russians and sepperatist can be legitimately described as "Nazis". Based on the evidence to date it is a minority and no where near becoming a majority.

No. That conclusion is simply not merited. It wouldn't be even if the ban were passed.

Certainly not from the evidence I've seen.

That seems to be a very gross overstatment. Care to present in evidence to support this?

You assumptions are not only contrary to fact they seem to be driving your conclusions and opinions.

 

When it pertains to what is in bills passed by that body it certainly has a strong case for doing so. Otherwise that's a strawman.

Is it? I'd like to see some facts supporting that case. Certainly the Ukrainian forces have killed some civilians in the recent conflict but the last cases that were clearly murder were under the leadership of the previous Russian supported president. Furthermore it is the Russians who are responsible for the conflict breaking out into open fighting and it is from all I've read the Russians and seperatist who are killing most of the civilians including those on an international flight.

Just because you make the claims doesn't mean it is true. Especially when you have biased your interpretation so much it is clearly propaganda on your part as well.

Please not that just because it is propaganda doesn't mean it is false. The US realized this a long time ago and indeed has found the truth makes the best propganda long term. Russians still seam to back the "big lie" though.

 

Ukraine is in a process and violence against civilians increases. Death toll of the notorious Nazi Kristalnacht was as high as 96+. Ukrainian government has surpassed that figure long time ago. What is more disturbing, Ukrainians are much more brutal than their Nazi predecessors. The present day Ukraine has rich tradition in this area: the most ruthless executioners of Jews during the WWII were Ukrainians and Poles. Well known pogroms of the Jews in the Russian Empire were committed by the Ukrainians.
This isn't ridiculous - people are dying. This has to be stopped - this way or another.

 

You should back your claims with some proper, authoritive links.

Your claims are at best misrepresentative; at worst misleading and false.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/europe-and-central-asia/ukraine/report-ukraine/



"During the protests in Kyiv, several dozen EuroMaydan activists went missing...."

"Abductions and ill-treatment of captives were common in Russian-occupied Crimea and the parts of eastern Ukraine controlled by separatists, affecting several hundred people. Among the first people targeted were members of local administrations, pro-Ukrainian political activists, journalists and international observers..."

"Allegations of abductions were repeatedly made against members of pro-Kyiv forces, particularly so-called volunteer battalions deployed to fight alongside regular forces in Donbass. Several cases of abuses by Aidar battalion were documented between June and August in Luhansk Region."

"MP Oleh Lyashko published several videos online of him leading a group of armed men in balaclavas apprehending, interrogating and ill-treating individuals he suspected of collaborating with separatists."

"There was evidence of summary killings by each side in the conflict. Several separatist commanders boasted of having put captives to death for alleged crimes, and the de facto separatist authorities introduced the “death penalty” in their “criminal code”

"Both sides failed to take reasonable precautions to protect civilians, in violation of the laws of war. Both placed troops, weaponry and other military targets in residential areas. On numerous occasions, separatist forces used residential areas and buildings as firing positions, while pro-Kyiv forces returned fire to these positions. There was little indication that either side was seriously investigating alleged violations of international humanitarian law and possible war crimes by its own forces."

Or maybe you have some other, incontrovertible evidence to offer beyond your opinion?

 

Why is the blame for the fighting being placed on the Russian and not the current Ukrainian Govt? I'm asking because according to the Minsk accords which Ukraine signed, it has to negotiate/communicate with the separatist the problem is that both the president and prime minister have publicly stated that they will NOT speak with the "terrorists". There is currently no telephone line between the two sides. In fact Russia is used as the middle man between the two sides. While the Seperatist said they are willing to discuss terms Kiev has refused to do so. How can Kiev uphold the Minsk agreement if it refuses to speak with the separatists?

According to numbers virtually all civilian casualties are in the east. Why would the separatists kill their own people? Why would Russia kill the same people she is said to support?

 

We already know enough about the subject without producing new evidence - we all know what is going there: people are being murdered to conserve a country concieved by Lenin, Stalin and Kruschev. Large part of population caught in that country were denied basic human rights. That country should be dismembered. For the reasons of humanity.

 

Sources and data please. Prior to the Russian intervention the opposite appeared to be true. Of course it was true under their former (Russian backed) president.

Hardly an analogus situation or process though is it. Maybe we should just invoke Godwin at this point.

Soucres and data please. That's an easy accusation for you to make. I've seen nothing, even from Russian sources, that would justify it.

One could say the same thing about Russia could they not? Even easier case to make as well.

Another completely unsupported accusation. Let's see you make a case for it. Not sure why you are draging the Poles into it though unless you are trying to divert attention from the topic at hand.

Ukrainians or Russians? We're talking about things over 100 years ago though so how is it relevant?

Russia could stop it easily and quickly simply by conforming to international law and treaties they have signed. Their failure to do so clearly indicates their guilt in the on going death and destruction. Trying to hold the Ukraine and others not even involved in the fighitng responsible for Ukraines legitmate self defence efforts while ignoreing the Russian criminal acts in this regard is ludicrous. Russia started this, it's on Russia to fall back in line with international law and end it.

 

My dear lwd, it seems that we are attending two different churches. I'm happy with that.

 

Because Russia is responsible for initiating the conflict, encouraging the seperatist, and despite thier statements to the contrary keeping the conflict going.

Looking at the list at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_II
I don't see that requirement (it is wiki so perhaps it got something wrong). It's also pretty clear that many of the terms of that agreement have been violated some indeed never complied with and that the Russian and seperatist forces have been at least as guilty of such acts as those in the Ukraine.

That they are in the East doesn't mean that they are seperatist or under seperatist control or that they were so at the time of their deaths. Indeed from all I've read most in the East do not support the seperatist or the Russians.

 

I whole heartiedly agree with your above statement concerning Russia. Interesting how hypocritical it is with them trying to dismember the Ukraine and using a similar but less accurate argument.

With me it's not a matter of religion. That you see it as such explains much.

 

Ah no. I meant that figuratively: we believe different sources and different explanations of the same thing. That's what I have meant.

 

When you have complete faith in one source, especially when it has been proven that it has presented false data repeatedly and intentionally then it is a matter of religion. Putin and other Russian officials have lied repeatedly about what is happening in the Ukraine and about what Russia's envolvment there really is. Furthermore the Russian state controled media has repeated these claims as the truth when there is conclusive evidence available that it is not. Yet for some reason you believe them rather than the myrid of other sources available. The most favorable conclusion I can draw is the religious one.

It is interesting that you think the possiblity that a minority in one region of a foreign country might be discriminated against is sufficient reason for a countro to violate international law, formal treaties, and launch an aggressive war that could well lead to the majority in being discriminated against.